Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/137726
題名: 我國小學閱讀理解教學成效之後設分析
A Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness on Elementary School Reading Instruction in Taiwan
作者: 蘇郁棻
Su, Yu-Fen
貢獻者: 郭昭佑<br>洪煌堯
Guo, Chao-Yu<br>Hong, Huang-Yao
蘇郁棻
Su, Yu-Fen
關鍵詞: 閱讀理解教學
閱讀理解教學成效
後設分析
Reading instruction
The effectiveness of reading comprehension instruction
Meta-analysis
日期: 2021
上傳時間: 1-Nov-2021
摘要: 摘 要\n本研究旨在探究臺灣地區國小階段閱讀理解教學的成效,並進一步探討閱讀理解教學介入,對於增進閱讀理解歷程中字詞義理解、文本理解、摘要、推論和理解監控等能力的成效,以及不同的調節變項對國小閱讀理解教學成效的影響。\n本研究採用後設分析研究法,蒐集臺灣1995年至2021年間以國小學童為對象進行閱讀理解教學的相關文獻,接著以選用準則進行篩選,最後納入79篇期刊論文進行進行探討。研究獲致結論如下:\n一、我國小學階段閱讀理解教學可達中度顯著立即效果。\n二、學習年段是影響閱讀理解教學成效的調節變項。\n三、教學總時間達1441~2000分鐘是影響閱讀理解教學效果的調節變項。\n四、融入的教學領域是影響中年級和摘要閱讀理解教學成效的調節變項。\n五、教學媒材的選用是影響閱讀理解教學的調節變項。\n\n最後,研究者根據所獲致結論,對閱讀理解的研究及教學實務提出建議供參考。
Abstract\nThe purpose of the study is to investigate the effects on elementary school reading instruction in Taiwan, and to further explore the intervention of reading comprehension teaching to improve the effectiveness of literal comprehension, text comprehension, abstract, inference, and comprehension monitoring in the process of reading comprehension, as well as different effects. The influence of adjustment variables on the effects of reading comprehension teaching in elementary schools.\nThis study used meta-analysis to collect relevant literature on reading comprehension teaching for elementary school students in Taiwan from 1995 to 2021, followed by selection criteria, and finally included 79 journal articles for discussion.\nThe conclusions of this study are as follows:\n1.Reading comprehension teaching in elementary schools in Taiwan can achieve a moderately significant immediate effect.\n2. Learning Grader is the moderating variable that affects the teaching effectiveness of reading comprehension.\n3. The total teaching time of 1441 ~ 2000 minutes is the moderating variable that affects the teaching effect of reading comprehension.\n4.The integrated teaching courses are the moderating variable that affects the teaching effect of middle grade and abstract reading comprehension.\n5.The selection of teaching materials is a moderating variable affecting the teaching of reading comprehension.\n\nFinally, based on the conclusions obtained, the researcher puts forward some recommendations for reference on the topic of research and teaching practice of reading comprehension.
參考文獻: 參考文獻\n中文部分\n王木榮、董宜俐(2006)。國小學童中文閱讀理解測驗:指導手冊。心理。\n王玳雅(2013)。故事結構教學對國小學童閱讀理解能力影響之後設分析。國立臺北教育大學。\n王梅玲、曾湘怡(2013)。兒童閱讀教學活動成效評估。國家圖書館館刊,2,83-110。\n王瓊珠(2012)。臺灣中文字詞教學研究之文獻回顧與展望。教育心理學報,44(2),253-272。\n李珣(2019)。多媒體教學對學習成效影響之後設分析。國立中原大學。\n何嘉雯、李芃娟(2013)。交互教學法對國小閱讀理解困難學生教學成效之研究。特殊教育與復健學報,11,101-125。\n吳佩勳(2015)。國內閱讀交互教學研究成效之統合分析研究。國立中正大學。\n吳訓生(2001)。國小低閱讀理解能力學生閱讀理解策略效果之研究。特殊教育學報,15,177-215。\n*吳珠綺(2013)。KWL 策略對國小四年級學童閱讀態度與閱讀理解成效之研究。國立臺東大學。\n*杜叔娟、歐陽誾(2014)。課堂回饋系統融入故事結構教學對國小一年級學生閱讀理解能力之影響。教育學誌 ,31,81-132。\n林文藝(2016)。多重閱讀理解策略系統對閱讀理解力影響-以線上與紙本分析。國立嘉義大學。\n林素秋(2013)。閱讀理解策略教學成效之行動研究:以國小中年級弱勢低閱讀能力學童為對象。國立屏東教育大學。\n林清山、程炳林(1995)。國中生自我調整學習因素與學習表現之關係暨自我調整的閱讀理解教學策略效果之研究·教育心理學報,28,15-58。\n林寶貴、錡寶香(2000)。中文閱讀理解測驗之編製。 特殊教育研究學刊,19,79-104。\n柯華葳(1999a)。閱讀能力的發展。於曾進興主編,語言病理學基礎第三卷(83-119頁)。 心理。\n柯華葳(1999b)。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。測驗年刊,46(2),1-11。\n柯華葳(2009)。教出閱讀力2:培養SUPER小讀者。親子天下。\n柯華葳(2010)。閱讀理解教學。載於王瓊珠、陳淑麗主編 ,突破閱讀困難:理念與實務(253-284)。心理出版社。\n柯華葳(2012)。由參與PIRLS看國際評比。載於中國教育學會(主編),2020教育願景(p.25-49),學富。\n柯華葳(2013)。閱讀是新世紀必要的學習管道。人文與社會科學簡訊,14(4),4-11。\n柯華葳(2020)。臺灣閱讀策略教學政策與執行。 教育科學研究期刊,65(1),93-114。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202003_65(1).0004\n柯華葳、詹益綾、丘嘉慧(2013)。PIRLS 2011報告--臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養 。http://www.dorise.info/DER/image_pirls/country_icon_2006/pirls_2011%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A.pdf\n柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游雅婷(2009)。臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養(PIRLS 2006報告)第二版。http://www.dorise.info/DER/download_PIRLS2006/PIRLS_2006_National%20Report(2nd%20Edition).pdf\n洪月女、楊雅斯(2014)。讀報結合閱讀理解策略教學對國小四年級學童學習成效之研究。教育科學研究期刊,59(4),1-26 https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2014.59(4).01\n洪秋蘭(2000)。國中語文學習困難學生閱讀理解與先前知識之評量與診斷。國立高雄師範大學。\n張妤婷(2015)。國小六年級學生閱讀理解能力及其相關因素統合檢証與分析。臺中教育大學。\n張建妤、柯華葳(2012)。數學成就表現與閱讀理解的關係:以TIMSS 2003數學試題與PTRLS 2006閱讀成就測驗為工具。教育心理學報,44(1),95-116。\n張紹勳(2019)。Meta分析實作:使用Excel & CMA程式(初版三刷)。五南。\n張毓仁、柯華葳、邱皓政、歐宗霖、溫福星(2011)。教師閱讀教學行為與學生閱讀態度和閱讀能力自我評價對於閱讀成就之跨層次影響:以 PIRLS 2006 為例。教育科學研究期刊,56(2),69-105。\n教育部(2010)。閱讀理解策略教學手冊。教育部。下載於課文本位閱讀理解教學教學策略資料庫網站https://pair.nknu.edu.tw/pair_system/Search_index.aspx?PN=Download\n教育部(2011a)。閱讀理解的文章與試題範例。教育部。下載於課文本位閱讀理解教學教學策略資料庫網站https://pair.nknu.edu.tw/pair_system/Search_index.aspx?PN=Download\n教育部(2011b)。在職教師閱讀教學增能研習手冊。教育部。下載於課文本位閱讀理解教學教學策略資料庫網站https://pair.nknu.edu.tw/pair_system/Search_index.aspx?PN=Download\n教育部(2012)。悅讀101:教育部國民中小學提升閱讀計畫。取自http://ireading.kh.edu.tw/plan/upload/教育部悅讀101計畫.pdf.\n教育部(2018)。PIRLS 提供的閱讀鑰匙。教育部國民及學前教育署。\n*許晴佩(2005)。QAR「問題-答案關係」閱讀理解策略教學對國小四年級學童閱讀理解成效之研究〔未出版碩士論文〕。國立臺中師範學院。\n連啟舜(2002)。國內閱讀理解教學研究成效之統合分析研究。國立臺灣師範大學。\n連啟舜、陳茹玲(2018)。自主閱讀:多重閱讀理解策略的教學模式。教育研究月刊,292,87-105。\n*郭曉蓉(2014)。合作學習法對學童閱讀動機與閱讀理解能力之影響。國立屏東教育大學。\n*陳明蕾(2018)。課文本位閱讀策略教學對國小學童閱讀表現與策略使用覺知情形之影響。教育心理學報,49(4),581-609。\n陳明蕾(2019)。台灣十年來教師閱讀教學與學生閱讀表現關係之探討:來自PIRLS 2006、2011與2016的證據。教育心理學報,51(1),51-82。 https://doi.org/10.6251/BEP.201909_51(1).0003\n陳信豪、黃瓊儀(2020)。淺談課文本位閱讀理解策略教學提升國小學生閱讀理解能力。臺灣教育評論月刊,9(5),98-103\n陳思宇(2020)。故事結構教學對國小閱讀理解困難學生閱讀理解能力成效之後設分析。國立臺北教育大學。\n陳海泓(2004)。無字圖畫書和錄影帶對兒童故事推論的影響。國立編譯館,32(2),51-63。\n*陳翌昀(2011)。DRTA 閱讀理解策略教學對國小四年級學生閱讀理解能力和閱讀態度之影響。國立臺南大學。\n陳景花(2018)。正向心理學介入對幸福與憂鬱效果之視覺化文獻回顧與後設分析。國立政治大學。\n陳景花、余民寧(2019)。正向心理學介入對幸福與憂鬱效果之後設分析。教育心理學報,50(4),551-586。\n曾玉村(2017)。閱讀理解的認知歷程與策略教學。柯華葳主編,閱讀理解策略教學(1–22頁)。教育部國民及學前教育署。\n曾玉村、連啟舜(2016)。讀懂最重要:提升素養促進學習的教育精髓。教育研究月刊,269,32-44。\n曾玉村、連啟舜(2016)。讀懂最重要:提升素養促進學習的教育精髓。教育研究月刊(高等教育),269,31-43。\n程炳林(2000)。教育大辭書:閱讀理解Reading Comprehension。檢自:http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1314195/國家研究院雙語詞彙、學術名詞曁詞書資訊網。\n*黃郁茹(2009)。ETR 閱讀策略對華文閱讀理解之影響。國立台灣師範大學。\n*黃婉婷(2012)。交互教學法對國小低年級學童閱讀理解能力與閱讀動機影響之研究。教育研究論壇,3(2),201-224。\n黃瓊儀(2012)。台灣近十年閱讀障礙學童閱讀理解策略教學成效之後設分析。東臺灣特殊教育學報,14,243-268。\n董宜俐(2003)。國小六年級學童中文閱讀理解測驗編製研究。臺中師範學院。\n劉佩嘉、孫懋麟 (2002)。直接教學法對提升學習障礙學生閱讀能力之探究。障礙者理解,2(2),45-53。\n劉宜芳、柯華葳 (2017)。線上閱讀研究之回顧與展望 。教育科學研究期刊,62(2),61-87。https:// doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).03\n蔡文標(2001)。直接教學法的理論及其在身心障礙學生教學上之運用。人文及社會學科教學通訊,11(5),139-155。\n鄭竹秀(2016)。國內使用繪本教學介入兒童語言能力成效之後設分析。國立台中教育大學。\n蔡義雄(2012)。學生學習的活化:閱讀。於何福田等著,臺灣教育的亮點(75-86頁)。屏東教育大學。取自屏東教大機構典藏資料庫。http://140.127.82.166/\n盧瑞珍(2013)。合作學習對學生學習成效影響之後設分析-以2005至2012年之學位論文與期刊為範圍。國立臺灣師範大學。\n謝進昌、陳敏瑜(2011)。國內教育、心理後設分析研究出版偏誤檢定之實徵分析。測驗學刊,58(2),391-422。\n謝進昌(2014)。合作學習相關閱讀教學模式成效統合:後設分析結果間一致性探討。教育與心理研究,37(4),83-111。 http://dx.doi.org/10.3966/102498852014123704004\n謝進昌(2015)。有效的中文閱讀理解策略:國內實徵研究之最佳證據整合。教育科學研究期刊,60(2),33-77。\n謝進昌(2019)。促進中文閱讀理解教學成效量化研究統合:調節變項影響與評估。教育科學研究期刊,64(4) ,175 -206。\n謝進昌、陳敏瑜(2020)。以統合研究建立相互教學有效性的在地證據:研究方法特徵影響評估。嘉大教育研究學刊,44,37-68。\n鍾素香、鄭英耀、 王佳琪(2015)。「閱讀理解篩選測驗」的再驗證和應用。測驗年刊,62(3),209-230。\n魏靜雯(2004)。心智繪圖與摘要教學對國小五年級學生閱讀理解與摘要能力之影響。國立台灣師範大學\n譚克平(2008)。極端值判斷方法簡介。台東大學教育學報,19(1),131-150。\n蘇子涵(2010)兒童摘要能力之研究。臺北市立教育大學。\n蘇宜芬、洪儷瑜、陳柏熹、陳心怡(2018)。閱讀理解成長測驗之編製研究。教育心理學報,497(4),557-580。https://doi.org/10.6251/BEP.201806_49(4).0003\n\n英文部分\nAlvermann, D. E., & Boothby, P. R. (1982). Text differences: Children`s perceptions at the transition stage in reading. Reading Teacher, 36(3), 298-302.\nCarrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure. TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 727-752.\nChall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. McGraw-Hill.\nCheung, A. C. K., & Slavin, R. E. (2012). How features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 7(3), 198-215. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2012.05.002\nCheung, A. C. K., & Slavin, R. E. (2016). How methodological features affect effect sizes in education. Educational Researcher, 45(5), 283-292. doi:10.3102/0013189X16656615\nCohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.\nDavis, D. S. (2010). A Meta-Analysis of Comprehension Strategy Instruction for Upper Elementary and Middle School Students. Graduate School of Vanderbilt University. https://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/etd-06162010-100830\nFlynn LJ, Zheng X, Swanson H. Instructing struggling older readers: A selective meta-analysis of intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. 2012; 27:21–32.10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00347.x\nGarcia, J. R., & Cain, K. (2014). Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English. Review of Educational Research, 84(1), 74-111. doi:10.3102/0034654313499616\nGrabe, W. (2004). Research On Teaching Reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 44 - 69. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190504000030\nGraesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371–395. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.371\nGuthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., McCann, A. D., Wigfield, A., Bennett, L., Punndstone, C. C., Rice, M. E., Faibisch, F. M., Hunt, B., & Mitchell, A. M. (1996). Growth of literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 306-332.\nHall, M. S., & Burns, M. K. (2018). Meta-analysis of targeted small-group reading intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 66, 54-66. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2017.11.002\nHebert, M., Bohaty, J. J., and Nelson, J. R., & Brown, J. (2016). The Effects of Text Structure Instruction on Expository Reading Comprehension: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 6, 107-128.\nMaroco. J (2021) What makes a good reader? Worldwide insights from PIRLS 2016. Reading and Writing 34(1). doi:10.1007/s11145-020-10068-8\nMayer, R. E., (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text: The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational Psychology Review, 8(4), 357-371.\nNAEP (2020). NAEP Report Card: Reading. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/about/framework/?grade=4\nNational Reading Panel [NRP] (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessmentof the scientific research literature on reading and its implication for reading instruction. Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/documents/report.pdf\nNess, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms: Teacher use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Educaiton, 25, 98-117.\nOECD (2010), PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do: Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science (Volume I), OECD Publishing.\nPearson, P. D. (2009). The roots of reading comprehension instruction. In S. Israel & G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 3-31). New York, NY : Routledge\nSavolainen, H., Ahonen, T., Aro, M., Tolvanen, A., & Holopainen, L. (2008). Reading comprehension,word reading and spelling as predictors of school achievement and choice of secondary education. Learning and Instruction, 18(2), 201-210.\nScammacca, N. K., Roberts, G. J., Cho, E., Williams, K. J., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S. R., & Carroll, M.(2016). A century of progress: Reading interventions for students in grades 4-12, 1914-2014.Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 756-800. doi:10.3102/0034654316652942\nScammacca, N. K., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., & Stuebing, K. K. (2015). A meta-analysis of interventions for struggling readers in grades 4-12: 1980-2011. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(4), 369-390. doi:10.1177/0022219413504995\nSlavin, R. E., & Smith, D. (2009). The relationship between sample sizes and effect sizes in systematic review in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 500–506.\nStevens, E. A., Park, S., & Vaugh, S. (2019). A review of summarizing and main idea interventions for struggling readers in grade 3 through 12: 1978-2016. Remedial and Special Education, 40(3), 131-149. doi:10.1177/0741932517749940\nValentine, J. C., & Cooper, H. (2008). A systematic and transparent approach for assessing the methodological quality of intervention effectiveness research: The Study Design and Implementation Assessment Device (Study DIAD). Psychological Methods, 13(2), 130-149. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.13.2.130\nWillingham DT. Ask the cognitive scientist: The usefulness of brief instruction in reading comprehension strategies. American Educator. 2007; 30(4):39–45. 50.
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
學校行政碩士在職專班
107911022
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107911022
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
102201.pdf3.94 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.